HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Sotomayor chides prosecut...

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 09:48 PM

Sotomayor chides prosecutor for ‘racially charged’ question

Source: Washington Post

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor accused a Texas federal prosecutor Monday of tapping into a “deep and sorry vein of racial prejudice” in his questioning of a black man facing a drug charge.

The justices did not accept Bongani Charles Calhoun’s request that the court review his conviction, but Sotomayor appended a scathing statement to make sure that the court’s denial was not be seen as a signal of “tolerance of a federal prosecutor’s racially charged remark.”

Sotomayor did not name Assistant U.S. Attorney Sam L. Ponder in her statement, but she denounced his questioning of Calhoun, who maintained in court that he did not know that the friends with whom he was traveling were planning a drug deal.

Ponder had asked Calhoun: “You’ve got African Americans, you’ve got Hispanics, you’ve got a bag full of money. Does that tell you — a light bulb doesn’t go off in your head and say, ‘This is a drug deal?’ ”

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sotomayor-chides-prosecutor-for-racially-charged-question/2013/02/25/23e4a836-7f8d-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_story.html

11 replies, 2930 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 11 replies Author Time Post
Reply Sotomayor chides prosecutor for ‘racially charged’ question (Original post)
alp227 Feb 2013 OP
blueclown Feb 2013 #1
Xipe Totec Feb 2013 #2
1KansasDem Feb 2013 #4
msanthrope Feb 2013 #6
Xipe Totec Feb 2013 #9
msanthrope Feb 2013 #10
msanthrope Feb 2013 #5
joshcryer Feb 2013 #8
msanthrope Feb 2013 #11
DeSwiss Feb 2013 #3
Hekate Feb 2013 #7

Response to alp227 (Original post)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 09:50 PM

1. Only Breyer joined with Sotomayor?

Why not the other 7 justices? Is something like this partisan?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blueclown (Reply #1)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 10:30 PM

2. The others were probably nodding their heads in agreement

with the prosecutor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xipe Totec (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 12:09 AM

4. When the supremes refuse to take up a case

I didn't believe we ever know what the vote is.
Refusing to take the case had nothing to do with the incendiary questioning of the witness.
It was basically a statute of limitations issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xipe Totec (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 12:59 AM

6. Nonsense. You think Ruth Bader Ginsburg would countenance racism? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #6)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 06:25 AM

9. And yet...

Silent she remained on that point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xipe Totec (Reply #9)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 08:13 AM

10. You have no frackin' clue what she said in conference. And you have no idea how rare a cert denial

statement is. Your inference--based on no facts at all, is revolting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blueclown (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 12:58 AM

5. It's a statement on a cert denial, pretty rare. As I noted on this thread,

the prosecutor did more than make one statement--and the DOJ should have done a better job on this.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2425506

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #5)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 01:50 AM

8. Thanks msanthrope.

Good to have a lawyer amongst us.

I hate law. Helped my mom edit her essays in real estate law and criminal law. Really fascinating stuff but it's not terribly interesting to me (fascinating when reading, but if I wasn't helping my mom edit her essays for school, I wouldn't have cared much about it, still I learned a lot). She can't do Word very well but she's one sharp lady.

edit: she actually has a signed letter from Sotomayor congratulating her on her success in criminal law, because she did a paper and sent it to Sotomayor and apparently Sotomayor read it. One of her proudest possessions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #8)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 08:14 AM

11. I would frame the letter. I admit to being a bit of fangirl. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Original post)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 11:04 PM

3. You can't ''unrotten'' an apple. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Original post)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 01:13 AM

7. Sotomayor was a good pick for the Court.

She's going to do us proud.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread